Scottish Law Online > Discussion Forum Community Home | Search | Contact
 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
 
Signup for free on this forum and benefit from new features!
Home Help Search Login Register



Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Rogue mechanics - they still do make them.. (Read 7038 times)
SJ12
Newbies
*
Offline


I'm new!

Posts: 9
Rogue mechanics - they still do make them..
Jan 22nd, 2013 at 6:01pm
 
Hello, some repair works were conducted to my vehicle. The vehicle has since seized, and the mechanics now denying all culpability going forward. It transpires that the mechanic cut corners, by not replacing recommended parts that since became causative to said seizure (timing belt, weren't replaced during head gasket repair). And now, 'retroactively' claiming I refused the timing belt change; clearly keen to head off liability for the terminal seizure and subsequent damage. Evidential, the costs I paid for said works 'suggest' otherwise. Basically; I'm trying to get some form of ballast, to prove the mechanic never advised me of replacing said parts - the mechanic just quoted, and I paid whatever he asked, and clearly he charged me for the full works, but never used the parts he was supposed too.

I find this aforementioned naughty of the mechanic, he's put us in a his word against mine situation, not good. I do have the letters the original mechanic sent me after inspecting the vehicle; and he clearly claims "a failure of a separate part" (confusing the lay person); I am surprised that the Joint Expert never picked up on this. However, the expert thinks I'll have difficulty proving either way?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grenache
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love YaBB 2!

Posts: 79
Re: Rogue mechanics - they still do make them..
Reply #1 - Jan 31st, 2013 at 8:32am
 
Whenever I get my car serviced (main dealer) they always note down on my invoice any recommendations, e.g. your brake pads need replacing.

If a mechanic was using his "professional skill and judgement", then perhaps you would have expected him to note this down, both to formally notify you of parts needing changed and also to absolve himself of responsibility. The fact that he didn't surely must count for something? Suggest that to the Joint Expert.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
(Moderator: YaBB Administrator)



Scottish Law Online Scottish Law Online Quick links:
Scotland: Law Society - Scottish Courts - Scotland Legislation - Scottish Parliament
England: Law Society - Courtservice - DCA - Home Office - Law Commission
UK: BAILII - OPSI - Parliament - House of Lords - Direct Gov - Legal 500 - Chambers
Europe: Europa - ECJ - ECHR - Eur-Lex - Commission - Parliament - OEIL
World: WorldLII - AustLII - CornellLII - Findlaw - UN - ICJ - WTO - Lex Mercatoria
Best of the Web: Amazon - Google - Y!Music - IMDB - BBC News - Radio1 - TV - RoF
Shop Online with Amazon
Discussion Forum Kevin F Crombie 2009